Taking back control of your Microsoft Negotiation: Mike Austin, Method 180 (ITAM Review US Annual Conference 2016)

1. Take
Back
Control
of
Your
Microso4
Audit/SAM
Engagement

2. About Us
Trusted globally by some of the world’s most well-known
enterprise companies, is the leading provider of
expertise and negotiation services around Enterprise software
contracts. Combining an unparalleled knowledge of the DNA that
make up software agreements with the ability to understand
company’s individual requirements, is able to drive
out significant costs and align agreements to business priorities
NOT to those of software vendors and their programmatic
objectives. Using technology, process and knowledge derived
from the analysis and negotiation of more than a thousand
contracts, we help put explanation around the unknowns that
create compliance gaps and control spiraling costs associated
with Enterprise software agreements.

3. Why are So+ware Audits/SAM Engagements
Such a Big Deal?
• Many
So4ware
Companies
are
increasing
the
frequency
with
which
they
audit
their
customers.
Even
though
some
of
these
audits
are
hidden
under
the
guise
of
a
friendly
So4ware
Asset
Management
(SAM)
engagement,
an
audit
is
an
audit
no
maFer
what
you
call
it.
• The
number
of
audits
is
increasing
dramaHcally
because
the
SAM
process
has
demonstrated
a
huge
return
on
investment
in
terms
of
increased
revenue
for
the
So4ware
Company

4. What's the risk?
• The
amount
of
data
required
for
an
audit—in
order
to
determine
what
licenses
you
own,
what
products
you
have
deployed;
and
how
many
licenses
you
actually
require—can
be
overwhelming.
Companies
that
are
facing
an
audit
can
o4en
be
frozen
by
the
complexiHes
and
sheer
volume
of
data
presented.
• So4ware
Companies
are
becoming
experts
at
this
audit
game.
They
train
their
audit
partners
to
be
very
conservaHve
in
how
they
view
the
data
and
to
present
the
facts
in
their
favor.

5. How Did I Get Nominated for an Audit?
• What
triggers
an
Audit?
• What
does
receiving
a
Audit/So4ware
Asset
Management
LeFer
mean?
• What
are
my
rights?

6. High Level Guidance
• GET
AN
NDA
IN
PLACE!
• Don’t
go
dark
on
the
auditor/engagement
manager
• Data
is
the
key
–
get
and
know
your
facts
• Do
not
share
data
(if
possible)
unHl
you
truly
understand
it
yourself
• Prepare
your
stories
to
explain
the
data
• Do
not
allow
them
to
make
assumpHons
based
on
not
understanding
your
data
•
NegoHate
with
the
auditors
prior
to
informaHon
being
handed
off
to
Microso4.

7.
Step 1 – The Challenges you will face
• Issue
#1
–
What
tool
will
be
used
to
collect
inventory
data
• NegoHate
to
use
your
tool
instead
of
the
auditor’s
tool.
If
you
are
pushed
back
on
this
request,
tell
them
you’d
like
to
provide
the
data
out
of
your
tool
and
then
have
the
auditor
validate
or
sample
the
data
against
data
points
that
come
out
of
your
tools,
rather
than
use
the
auditor’s
tool
to
perform
the
whole
audit.
• Issue
#2
–
There
is
no
clear
defini;on
of
the
license
metric
• The
key
is
that
the
auditor
is
looking
for
reasonableness
that
the
device
exists
on
the
network
and
requires
a
license.
What
they
are
not
doing
is
reviewing
your
unique
scenarios
to
see
if
that
reasonableness
holds
true
in
your
organizaHon.
That’s
why
it’s
so
important
that
the
SOW
reflect
what
is
being
used
to
calculate
licenses
required
based
on
your
business,
not
on
the
auditor’s
reasonableness
assumpHons.

8.
Step 1 – The challenges you will face
• Issue
#3
–
User
Accounts
are
Determined
out
of
Your
Directory
• For
certain
products,
license
counts
can
be
based
on
the
number
of
users
that
are
accessing
the
technology.
The
problem
with
this
approach
is
that
directories
are
rarely
kept
100%
accurate
by
companies
(for
many
reasons)
and
o4en
show
more
users
than
are
actually
present.
• Issue
#4
–
Your
tool
does
not
provide
the
edi;ons
of
some
products
such
as
SQL
Servers.
• The
auditors
will
make
an
argument
that
they
cannot
use
your
tools
because
they
do
not
report
product
ediHons
(e.g.
whether
or
not
a
SQL
Server
is
a
Standard
or
Enterprise
EdiHon).
Microso4
and
their
auditors
will
use
this
point
to
use
their
own
tools
and/or
the
Microso4
Assessment
and
Planning
Toolkit
(MAP)
to
perform
the
audit.
Your
goal
is
to
convince
the
auditor
to
use
your
tool.

9.
Step 1 – The Challenges you will face
• Issue
#5
–
Virtualiza;on
Rules
are
hard
to
monitor
and
determine.
• The
auditors
will
provide
their
summaries
within
the
ELP,
but
they
do
not
provide
any
detailed
documentaHon
of
their
findings.
This
means
you
are
le4
to
determine
how
they
have
interrupted
your
deployment
data
(an
overwhelming
task)
to
validate
its
accuracy.
Experience
tells
us
that
the
auditors
will
most
likely
take
a
very
conservaHve
approach
to
this.
• Issue
#6
–
The
SoNware
Company
will
not
provide
a
truly
accurate
record
of
what
licenses
you
own.

10.
Dealing with the ELP
• The
auditors
will
provide
their
summaries
within
the
ELP,
but
they
do
not
provide
any
detailed
documentaHon
of
their
findings.
This
means
you
are
le4
to
determine
how
they
have
interpreted
your
deployment
data.
• The
auditor
will
take
a
VERY
conservaHve
approach
• Many
clients
know
that
the
ELP
is
wrong,
will
tell
the
auditors
this,
but
are
unable
to
get
them
to
change
the
ELP
to
reflect
reality.

11.
What to Focus on in the ELP
• Ensure
development
and
test
servers
need
licenses
• Watch
for
duplicate
machines/users
within
the
data
set
• Have
virtualizaHon
rules
been
opHmally
applied?
• It’s
important
to
note
that
different
versions
of
a
product
will
have
different
virtualizaHon
rights
associated
with
a
license
enHtlement
(for
example,
SQL
Server
2008R2,
2008,
2005
and
2000
all
have
different
virtualizaHon
rules)
• User
vs.
Device
Licenses
• Non
licensable
enHHes
included
in
the
counts

12. The NegoNaNon Playbook
• Have
a
negoHaHons
plan
and
know
what
to
expect
• You
need
to
know
the
numbers
beFer
then
they
do
or
they
will
win
• AnHcipate
their
reacHons
to
your
data
and
know
your
escalaHon
paths
• Do
not
be
afraid
to
escalate
when
and
where
it
makes
sense
• This
is
business
its
not
personal
• Don’t
let
them
play
us
versus
them
game
• SAM
Teams
vs
Account
Team
• Finger
poinHng
back
and
forth
to
avoid
giving
you
a
concession

13. The NegoNaNon Playbook
• Tips
for
NegoHaHng
a
SeFlement:
• Stay
calm.
Know
that
you
followed
the
steps
outlined
in
this
white
paper
so
you
are
prepared
and
have
all
the
informaHon
that
you
require.
• Do
not
be
pressured
into
Hmelines.
Your
goal
is
to
have
a
fair
and
adequate
ELP
created
that
reflects
your
actual
use
and
license
requirements.
Do
not
be
forced
into
a
seFlement
that
is
not
accurate
due
to
monthly
sales
pressures
or
tacHcs

14. The NegoNaNon Playbook
• Be
prepared.
Be
ready
to
research
the
licensing
terms
and
other
claims
the
vendor
makes
to
provide
backup
documentaHon
of
your
claims.
• Leverage.
Be
willing
to
leverage
senior
execuHves
within
your
company.
A
well-­‐Hmed
call
to
the
right
person
at
the
vendor
can
be
very
effecHve
to
unblock
a
stalemate
in
the
process.
• Stay
focused.
Your
goal
is
to
purchase
only
what
you
need.

15. Case Study

16. • Financial
Services
OrganizaHon
with
around
8000
devices.
• Selected
randomly
for
an
audit.
• IniHal
assumpHon
from
the
auditor
(an
accounHng
firm)
was
$129M
gap.
The Scenario

17. Assumed
everyone
needed
Office,
project
etc
based
on
server
deployments.
• AssumpHon
was
that
end
points
needed
to
be
licensed
as
they
were
accessing
Office
bits
on
a
server.
• Need
to
have
access
restricHons
and
user
account
properly
licensed
to
access
those
bits.
• Log
review
was
uHlized
to
show
who
was
really
accessing
the
servers.
Incorrect assumpNons made by auditor

18. Mistakenly
included
non
idenHfied
Non
ProducHon/UAT/Dev
Test
environments
as
producHon.
• Anyone
who
accessed
development
environments
or
have
their
tested
with
bit
was
assumed
to
be
a
developer
who
required
a
development
license
(MSDN).
• Clearly
idenHfy
developers,
subscripHon
levels
and
development
environments.
Incorrect assumpNons made by auditor

19. Counted
PCs
which
were
in
transit
to
be
replaced.
• This
triggers
qualified
devices
clauses
within
the
Microso4
contract.
• It
is
important
to
document
the
%
you
are
refreshing
on
an
annual
basis
and
be
prepared
to
back
it
up
with
facts/numbers.
Incorrect assumpNons made by auditor

20. Counted
SQL
Server
Express
as
STD
or
ENT
EdiHon
• Legacy
2005/2008
versions
o4en
show
up
in
tools
as
STD
or
ENT
EdiHon
and
they
will
assign
cores
to
them.
• Be
aware
of
this
glitch.
Incorrect assumpNons made by auditor

21.
SePled
for
$700K
in
compliance.
Started
at
$129M
Outcome

22. Thank you and QuesNons
Mike
AusHn
mike@method180.com
519-­‐319-­‐2114
@infomethod180
@ausHnmik